Nicholas Kang

Sorry, I misunderstood your meanings. Now, I will edit the post. So, basically, all the points that I had pointed towards you shall now be pointed towards those who object this decision made by IAU. I apologize regretfully. Sorry, Mr. Ophiolite.

Ok, sorry. I forget to explore the vast thread in the forum. I apologize for that. Can you please teach me a way to shut down this thread or lock this thread?

Why Stephen Hawking said there are no black holes? If so, do you think grey hole do exist. How and why?

You don`t trust Big Bang?

As a science researcher, we shouldn`t go by feelings. This is the basic principle in Science and when you are encountering conflicts or problems needed to be solved in Science. You can`t resist change in Science. We did spend money on New Horizons. But that doesn`t mean just because it is not a planet, then we should stop exploring it. It is our duty, as a member of the scientific research community, to reveal the secret of the nature. Because of our curiosity. we are willing to spend money to explore space, to invent rockets, space shuttle and start unmanned exploration missions. If you say New Horizons is just a waste of money because it is not investigating a planet, then how would you explain the fact that probes exploring natural satellites, the Sun and the Main Belt. Just because they are not planets? If so, then Mr. Armstrong shouldn`t land on the moon in 1969.

Why Pluto is a dwarf planet? It was being demoted to dwarf planet status during the IAU conference. First, what is planet? A planet must fulfill these characteristics: 1. It has enough mass to form itself into a spherical shape. 2. It is a celestial body that orbits around a sun. 3. It clears away all smaller objects in its immediate neighbourhood. Pluto fulfills the first 2 but not the last requirement, thus it is a dwarf planet. My question is why they are still objection towards this decision? Are they any reasons that can be proved to show that this decision is wrong?

Dark energy can explain why stars at the outer region of the galaxy won`t fly out of it. Dark matter accounts for the unknown mass of the universe.

But it is too hard for me. Yet, I find this topic fun. Scientist at the LHC keep on discovering new particles or more precisely elementary particles. Isn`t it sound crazy to continuously just stay at the ATLAS, CMS etc. just to play and run the particles to just collide and no more than that? I have no idea of what this means: I am stupid. Can you please tell me more formally or somehow more clearly. Your analogy is confusing me. Sorry to say that.

Ok, thanks. I shall be prepared before I continue my journey.

May I ask you one question? How to draw Feynman Diagram? How is it related to the Perturbation Theory?

Is it possible that our universe has no start and end? Maybe the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation is just some radiation emitted from an unknown source? It might not be the evidence of Big Bang but the only clue for a new theory to emerge? Maybe the universe is just always exist or somehow we can use Darwin`s Evolution and Natural Selection Theory in this context. So, we may assume that the universe is just an evolution form an older universe, so the universe can only be old but not young, so, the universe will eventually die and fade and it is the end, no new Big Bang?

How many charges are there in quantum chromodynamics?

Higgs Boson was said to be discovered recently. People are always confused with the fact that mass in particles are caused by Higgs Boson. In reality, it is the field which the Higgs Bosons are situated- Higgs Boson Field that has a higher resting value than the other fundamental force fields, i.e. The 4 Fundamental Force Fields. If Higgs Boson Field provide mass to particles situated in it, then what supplies mass to the field itself?

Is it possible to have a third charge apart from the ordinary positive and negative? Maybe the third charge would be a charge that can alter or shift its charge from positive and negative at a specific interval or simultaneously?

Then I better study Newtonian Physics. Let`s come back to the topic. I think there must be a theory that would explain this. Maybe the answer is hidden in where we live-Space. The smallest thing in the world is the largest thing in the world-Space. You can somehow imagine the string or quarks is a sphere of space line that grip and combine well. This is my pure thought-it needs all of your calculation. i don`t think I have the ability to calculate this high energy physics all by myself.

Ok, thanks. But you know I am really attracted by the interesting topics in the university. I am eager to study at university now. Not "wrong", not "inaccurate"? Could you please tell me the appropriate word that should be used?

Not "wrong", then sorry for inappropriate usage of words. Then, I will change my word to inaccurate theory.

Strange, you are really strange. You can see my details in my profile. One question, why secondary school don`t teach modern physics but only classical physics. Since you know most of Newton`s Law had been overturned by Einstein`s theory, why the school still teach us the inaccurate thing, making us maybe or somehow face problem when entering university.

It is really a crazy job for a 15-year-old to understand and study string theory. If I could do that, I would have break the world record. Anyway, I will try. Thanks for promoting enthusiasm for me to study string theory.

String theory sounds complex and what is quantisation process? What is local symmetry and classical symmetry?

Sensei, I am just 15 years old and it is not wrong if I don`t understand string theory. Actually, I did come across books about string theory. I just know briefly about it. 11 dimension consists of 4 dimension spacetime and the other 6 dimensions came from some functions in Maths. All forces and matter particles fit well in 11 dimension, thus it must be 11 dimension, mustn`t it? Am I right, Sensei?

Thanks Mordred and imatfaal. You have greatly broaden my knowledge.

Sometimes, you can trust scientist and you must trust scientist. If you don`t trust scientist, then your mind would be empty, not broaden with knowledge. But, when your knowledge reach a point in which you think you should revolutionize, you should go for that. It depends on the context. Since you have wide knowledge, it is time for you to think, think, think and think. Reconsidering basic principles, are they true? How would you falsify them if you think they are false? Think of Newton and his classical physics laws? Everyone did think and learn during secondary school. But who rethink it and combine his idea with Maxwell`s Equation? Einstein. Only Einstein? No, others did so. But they are not as farsighted as Einstein. So, I should emphasize the fact that you should trust scientists before you are dare enough to challenge them and firm enough to challenge them. Only until you reach a point in which you are ready and steady, it is time to unleash your powerful mindset. If you success, you can simply throw the ordinary theory into the rubbish bin. People would just follow your theory until it is being challenged again.

More precise result? I don`t think so. The same as things smaller than string. Even you magnify until the string level of the beaker`s calibration, smaller than atoms and quarks of the beaker`s wall, you can`t get the most precise result because string do occupy space. So, infinite answer, impossible to get the final answer. Measurement can infinitely accurate, until no end. Your decimal point will reach till no end, filling up the entire universe and beyond, but still can`t figure out when the decimal points stop.

You are right, Sensei. 1m cubed of water contains 100cm times 100cm times 100cm of water, which equals 1000000cm cubed we know pure water has density 1g/cm cubed 1 metric tonne is 1000kg, which equals to 1000 times 1000gram, which equals 1000000g So, 1000000/1000000 you get 1g/cm cubed or simply 1, which verifying the statement 1m cubed of water has mass 1 tonne. I verify the above statement by maths theoretically. Now, for practical experiment, you can simply use giant containers to store 1m cubed of water and simply weight it by all means(any possible method), like using gigantic weighting machine, or maybe other sophisticated apparatus if possible. if you must do it in a science lab, then you can only use proportion method, which means instead of 1m cubed to 1 tonne, you can simplify the values to maybe 100cm cubed to 100gram and test it. Again, this idea requires theoretical skills to simplify the exact value before doing such experiment because it is very unlikely to carry out experiment involving 1m cubed of water and 1 tonne in a science lab.